Value of: Rickard Rakell to Calgary?

[Mike Smith]

What would the asking price be?

Click to read more...

 

[Boondock]

What would the asking price be?

1st + prospect.
2 x 30+ goal scorer, struggling now but his entire team is so it's not a Rakell thing its a Ducks thing. Signed at a very reasonable rate for what he produces for next season as well.

 

[TheKrebsCycle]

1st + prospect.
2 x 30+ goal scorer, struggling now but his entire team is so it's not a Rakell thing its a Ducks thing. Signed at a very reasonable rate for what he produces for next season as well.

Not a recent 30 goal scorer though, which matters.

 

[Boondock]

Not a recent 30 goal scorer though, which matters.

Still the asking price I would assume. Calgary doesn't get Rakell for Bennett and a 2nd is my point

 

[Zegs2sendhelp]

Not a recent 30 goal scorer though, which matters.

He’s playing well on Anaheim, a bit unlucky and no talent around him but I wouldn’t put him in a buy cheap category and I wouldn’t move him for less than a 1st +

 

[Ledge And Dairy]

1st + prospect.
2 x 30+ goal scorer, struggling now but his entire team is so it's not a Rakell thing its a Ducks thing. Signed at a very reasonable rate for what he produces for next season as well.

1st + Kuzy? (top 10 protected)

 

[Sparky93]

I was pretty excited about the guy earlier but I'm not sure he's a good fit for us. He'd be a rental unless we were into exposing one of Backlund, Dube or Mangi, so that makes the cost considerably higher. Plus his playoff numbers are surprisingly poor and he just seems to similar to what we already have.

 

[lwvs84]

Rakell has been top 2 in points on the Ducks for the last 4 or 5 years, it's not that he isn't capable of putting up the points he did before, it's that there aren't any other top line players in Anaheim anymore and has been limited by talent around him.

 

[FameFlame069]

1st + prospect.
2 x 30+ goal scorer, struggling now but his entire team is so it's not a Rakell thing its a Ducks thing. Signed at a very reasonable rate for what he produces for next season as well.

His highest shooting percentage in a season before or after was 11.72% and in his two 30+ season's they were 18.3% and 14.8%, therefore until he proves he can still score 30, I'd settle down on those dreams, i think you'll get a 2nd +, but if anyone gives up a 1st they aren't adding unless hes at 50%, Rakell is a 40+ point, 2 time 30G and 50+ points, 1 time 20G, he simply had better puck luck those seasons, whens the last time he played a full season? ... yeah that's right....

 

[treple13]

I was high on this deal until I realized he's a pure rental (or if he isn't, we have lose another good player in exchange). So is Rakell worth Backlund, 1st+? Not really. I suppose we could always just trade him again after the season (or whoever else). But that's a real issue that I'm not sure there's a good answer for.

 

[Man Bear Pig]

Guy can play but you'd have to at least look at who you're going to protect in expansion if you brought him or any other player brought in past this season.

 

[Trojans86]

His highest shooting percentage in a season before or after was 11.72% and in his two 30+ season's they were 18.3% and 14.8%, therefore until he proves he can still score 30, I'd settle down on those dreams, i think you'll get a 2nd +, but if anyone gives up a 1st they aren't adding unless hes at 50%, Rakell is a 40+ point, 2 time 30G and 50+ points, 1 time 20G, he simply had better puck luck those seasons, whens the last time he played a full season? ... yeah that's right....

Not at all the truth. Pretty much everyone that watches the Ducks regularly has always known he is not a line driver amd his production is greatly influenced by his linemates. Put him with talent and he will easily score 30 again because he has a ton of skill. Put him on a shit Ducks team and his point total falls off. This has always been the case as he moved to different lines and was very predictable, just like how Ducks fans can see him being a 65 point player on a good top line.

 

[FameFlame069]

Not at all the truth. Pretty much everyone that watches the Ducks regularly has always known he is not a line driver amd his production is greatly influenced by his linemates. Put him with talent and he will easily score 30 again because he has a ton of skill. Put him on a shit Ducks team and his point total falls off. This has always been the case as he moved to different lines and was very predictable, just like how Ducks fans can see him being a 65 point player on a good top line.

So you're saying he wasn't shooting at a higher percentage? I guess nhl.com doesn't have good stats? Im going off each season not by players, go ahead and show me the players he played with in those seasons and prove it, if not im not saying anything about it, he clearly had a higher shooting percentage which usually means better puck luck.

 

[RationalExpectations]

The thing with Rakell is that he has a steal of a contract and imagine retained at 50 per cent, the value increases even more. Value should be higher than Coleman s : 1st + good prospect (former late 1st pick), so 1st + Pelletier I d say.

 

[KaseMeOutside]

Rakell is honestly playing very good 3 zone hockey and is our best forward this year, it only recently started translating to points and that is going to impact his value. Honestly our inability to score is killing the values of so many players

 

[KaseMeOutside]

His highest shooting percentage in a season before or after was 11.72% and in his two 30+ season's they were 18.3% and 14.8%, therefore until he proves he can still score 30, I'd settle down on those dreams, i think you'll get a 2nd +, but if anyone gives up a 1st they aren't adding unless hes at 50%, Rakell is a 40+ point, 2 time 30G and 50+ points, 1 time 20G, he simply had better puck luck those seasons, whens the last time he played a full season? ... yeah that's right....

He was playing with Getzlaf those years mostly, so it makes sense his shooting percentages would be higher when Getzlaf was still performing like a number 1 center because there's going to be higher quality shooting opportunities...

 

[Tkachuk Norris]

The thing with Rakell is that he has a steal of a contract and imagine retained at 50 per cent, the value increases even more. Value should be higher than Coleman s : 1st + good prospect (former late 1st pick), so 1st + Pelletier I d say.

for a UFA 40-50 point winger we should pay more than we did for 23 year old Dougie Hamilton?

Coleman had 2 years left on his deal. And I much prefer Pelletier to Foote

 

[TheKrebsCycle]

for a UFA 40 point winger we should pay more than we did for 23 year old Dougie Hamilton?

Coleman had 2 years left on his deal

Not only that but Coleman was sort of viewed as the last piece to the puzzle. Tampa had a clear template of the type of players they wanted to add, to go all in .

 

[Tkachuk Norris]

2nd + Bennett + Emilio Pettersen is what I would offer.

if it gets beat it gets beat

 

[Trojans86]

So you're saying he wasn't shooting at a higher percentage? I guess nhl.com doesn't have good stats? Im going off each season not by players, go ahead and show me the players he played with in those seasons and prove it, if not im not saying anything about it, he clearly had a higher shooting percentage which usually means better puck luck.

Key word being usually.

Yes he shot better with better linemates but also had much much better quality shots so I'd expect a much higher shooting % playing alongside Getzlaf in his prime.

 

[RationalExpectations]

for a UFA 40-50 point winger we should pay more than we did for 23 year old Dougie Hamilton?

Coleman had 2 years left on his deal. And I much prefer Pelletier to Foote

Rakell also has 1.5y left. You prefer him because he is a CGY prospect. He may be a bit better but they are the same tier

 

[Hierso]

2nd + Bennett + Emilio Pettersen is what I would offer.

if it gets beat it gets beat

Rakell isn't the type of player the Flames should target, and the Flames isn't the target that the Ducks should go after either. Rakells maximum value probably is in trading him to a contender that wants a cheap & solid winger.

 

[Sparky93]

Rakell isn't the type of player the Flames should target, and the Flames isn't the target that the Ducks should go after either. Rakells maximum value probably is in trading him to a contender that wants a cheap & solid winger.

I agree. A team at the top of the pack and up against the cap is obviously going to be more inclined to pay more, especially if the Ducks retain salary. It just doesn't make sense for us, with the expansion implications.

 

[Zegs2sendhelp]

Rakell isn't the type of player the Flames should target, and the Flames isn't the target that the Ducks should go after either. Rakells maximum value probably is in trading him to a contender that wants a cheap & solid winger.

Agree

flames need a lot more than Rakell to become a serious contender

 

[Nanuuk]

I was pretty excited about the guy earlier but I'm not sure he's a good fit for us. He'd be a rental unless we were into exposing one of Backlund, Dube or Mangi, so that makes the cost considerably higher. Plus his playoff numbers are surprisingly poor and he just seems to similar to what we already have.

And that is the key to any trade the Flames make. If they want to keep a new RW longer term, the player going back would have to be someone that you'd reasonable expect them to protect during the expansion draft.

Off hand that would be one of Gaudreau, Monahan, Lindholm, Tkachuk, Backlund, Dube, Mangiapane, Hanifin, Andersson, Tanev, Markstrom. This assumes Lucic waives his NMC.

So the long and the short of it is that the Flames would need to part with someone where we have positional strength (LW and LD) if they didn't want to lose the inbound player in the draft.